It is mildly surprising that John Kerry chose John Edwards to be his running mate. It seemed a slightly more likely (and indeed safer) choice would have been Washington "insider" Dick Gephardt (for his "gravitas" and familiarity with the ins and outs of DC politics as well as his ties to big Labor, a fading but still potent part of the Democratic equation.)
But, that said, the colorless Kerry probably chose the energetic Edwards as a way of giving the ticket some "zing", hoping that Edwards will stir up the kind of enthusiastic passion that Democrats are always hungering after (and that they had in a certain current bestselling author....whatever else you can say about Bill Clinton you can never call him colorless...or, for better or for worse, passionless.)
Edwards, though, seems more like Dan Quayle than Bill Clinton, enthusiastic but wet behind the ears and just one gaffe away from becoming a perpetual punchline on late night talk shows (one can easily imagine that Jon Stewart and David Letterman are already poised to pounce often and hard.)
Bush and his pompously pugnacious attack dog Cheney.
Kerry and his giddy "young" protege Edwards.
Nader and that guy he picked to run his pointless race with him.
These are our choices and I feel like Richard Pryor in "Brewster's Millions" wanting desperately to vote for "None of the Above". But I won't. I will hold my nose and pick one (not voting would only make me part of the problem...and, just as importantly, being an active voter is my ticket to being able to rant as much as I wish :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment